Not so sure what's shocking about this considering who the US govt. originally claimed were the high jackers are still alive today. I had seen the
interview of them with them holding the pictures that said they were high jackers.

It was then stated the ID's were stolen then new ones appeared etc, etc, so whats the big deal here? Heck one of them at one point posted to youtube
pleading they take him off their list because they were wrong and he was being threatened on almost a daily basis.

This OP is getting rather annoying in his stubbornness, I don't think he mentioned anything about building 7.
OP, would you say building 7 fell due to debris hitting the side of the building? Or the few office fires. Choice one is very improbable because even
if it was the case, the building would not have fell straight down. Impossible for that amount of debris to take down that entire building without any
pre-movement suggesting structural failure. If choice 2 is your suggestion, take a look at this:

I think we are all waiting on you there OP..This is like the 15th thing you cant back up today..i would stay in the kiddy pool before you start
calling people out for debates..You have spouted nothing but lies all dam day,and ignored responses to facts..

I wonder if that's the end of him, for today at least. I agree with the person on the second page, who felt it was remarkably similar to the poster
Brad James yesterday who got banned. A trollish topic on 9/11 truth, poor logic, declaring Mark Roberts fantastic, very short posts, very little or
no facts. Yep, smells like him to me too.

It's that kind of attitude I dislike most from certain people on both sides of the debate, an aggressive attitude and definitive statements, who will
not even argue about it. I don't argue much on 9/11, as it's such a huge subject, with so much you need to research, that it is very difficult. I
just wish some of those who also clearly have not done serious research would not be so sure of themselves, when all they can do is spout talking
points, without really understanding them.

If something like that is shocking to you then you must not get out much. People screw things like that up all the time, or giving the proper amount
of change, or properly installing hardware or even fixing your car. Things they even do for a living. Really it's a condition of being human.

People kept believing that the Sun revolved around the Earth for decades after Copernicus proved otherwise, so in a word, yes.

People also believed that the USS Maine was punctured from the outside (as in, from a mine) until the 1970's when a US Navy investigation
proved it was actually an internal explosion. How many years was that? So once again, yes, it certainly happens, and much worse.

man, this unit guy registered 3 days ago and started making this kind of theads .. that is non sense .... the guy is clearly a desinfo agent ... and I
am sure he is beeing paid to post here ... that is just not possible

well, lets work with FACTS .. please, if you want to do something ,you could research, instead of making this threads that just doesnt add up anything
... you seem like a crazy dog

Some people come here just because they like to aggressively engage people. It makes them feel better about themselves. Specifically, when you
defend your "intellectual territory," and you feel sufficiently satisfied, you brain releases "feel-good" endorphins.

Democrats and Republicans alike are adept at making decisions without letting the facts get in the way, a new study shows.

And they get quite a rush from ignoring information that's contrary to their point of view. ...

The test subjects on both sides of the political aisle reached totally biased conclusions by ignoring information that could not rationally be
discounted, Westen and his colleagues say.

Then, with their minds made up, brain activity ceased in the areas that deal with negative emotions such as disgust. But activity spiked in the
circuits involved in reward, a response similar to what addicts experience when they get a fix, Westen explained.

The study points to a total lack of reason in political decision-making.

"None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged," Westen said. "Essentially, it appears as if partisans twirl
the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want, and then they get massively reinforced for it, with the elimination of negative
emotional states and activation of positive ones."

Notably absent were any increases in activation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain most associated with reasoning.

One could easily see the same behavior on any other controversial issue for which two sides are clearly divided. It's very typical of social
sciences and how many people just try to conform to the prevailing mentality they have learned to identify themselves with, with a twist that it makes
them feel good physically. So they actively seek that "reward."

One thing that people seem to miss is that WTC7 was not just on fire. It had been right near the epicenter of two massive buildings collapsing. I am
sure material rained down on WTC7 PLUS the massive amount of air pushing threw from the collapse of WTC 1 & 2. That air/shock wave went for blocks
and blocks. What do you think it would have been like if you were right in the WTC complex?

Originally posted by Faiol
man, this unit guy registered 3 days ago and started making this kind of theads .. that is non sense .... the guy is clearly a desinfo agent ... and I
am sure he is beeing paid to post here ... that is just not possible

well, lets work with FACTS .. please, if you want to do something ,you could research, instead of making this threads that just doesnt add up anything
... you seem like a crazy dog

Whats even MORE sad is the fact that they allow threads like this from this guy (who has already been banned) to stay on the boards, yet Craig Rankes
thread got trashed.

The OP, and his sidekick grapesofraft are trolls. Everyone should just put them on 'ignore'

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.